Ralph Bakshi's Lord of the Rings is kind of a mess
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 авг 2024
- Please note that there were mic issues with this one, and the audio is uneven. I highly recommend watching without headphones. Apologies!
Got video Ideas?: forms.gle/VNTu...
Donate to my tip jar: ko-fi.com/part...
Follow me on Instagram: / parttimehobbit
Contact me: parttime.hobbit.business@gmail.com
Citations are available upon request!
Music by Epidemic Sound. Check out my referral link here: share.epidemic...
The reason Saruman is sometimes called Aruman is that partway through production, the producers thought the names Sauron and Saruman were too similar and made them change it arbitrarily, but didn't make them go back and re-dub the scenes that were already recorded.
So methought, so methought!
I mean those names are really similar.... kind of weird that Tolkien couldn't think of different sounding names
@@qcrew2938 The three main villains of the four books anyone can read without falling asleep: Sauron, Saruman, and Smaug. Wonder if he just thought S, A, and U sounded sinister together.
@@qcrew2938 Oh, given his lingual abilities, I am sure he could. Why he didn't, I would guess that... it would be pure conjecture of me to guess. I know when I write, at times characters will have similar names, and some will have repeated names, which is a very common thing, realistically. Naming characters, worlds, and places is a difficult task (for me), and once you do it, you want to leave them alone, for they crop up in the oddest places!
Only naming stories is harder, to me.
I guess it just goes to show how slapped together everything was in this movie...
Ralph Bakshi has always been very frustrated that Peter Jackson has never fully acknowledged the influence that this movie had on Peters version. Theres too many similaritys to compare.
Ive always wondered why Peter doesnt talk about this movie becuase without it, you wouldnt have the 2000's version. It was because of this movie that Peter bought the books and read them while on a train back to Wellington in 1978 at the age of 17.
its a shame really. And there was an interview with Ralph about all this in 2015 and he seriuously wasnt happy about it still.
In the DVD commentary, Jackson does mention some similar shots as tributes to Bakshi's film.
@@sanjurosama he does but before Jacksons first movie was released he stated he'd never seen Ralphs version. But when Fans noticed after TFOTR's release alot of similarities in Ralphs version to the live action one, Peter then changed his story and said he had seen the movie (hence it was Ralphs movie that made peter go and buy the book and read it on a train back to Wellington). Thats what made Ralph angry on top of only mentioning him once in the extended audio commetry. All the other actors and crew never talk about Ralphs version sadly, but my theory is that Saul Zantz or Robert Shaye told Peter not to mention it.
After all, it was Robert Shaye that said to Peter while it was still a 2 parter film that if a deal is struck with Newline Cinema, then it HAS to be 3 movies and not 2.
I'm not calling Peter a crook but its still a mysery as to why he hasn't talked about it much. Especially since he's very down to earth and often complments other film makers including Speilberg and Ray Harryhausen.
he stole whole sections almost shot for shot. same set rebuilt, same set up and literally shot for shot in some cases outright theft
I watched this when it was released or rather pirated in 1978 with my teenage aunt and uncle. I was only 5 years old and I thought it was great. It got me into Tolkien and I'm forever grateful for this movie.
Strangely, the Bakshi versions of the characters from The Fellowship were my definitive take on what the characters looked like for a LONG time. Especially when twinned with some of the art by Angus McBride. Combine that with the voice cast from the BBC version and it was "my" Middle-earth for ages!
Very good point. I think we have to thank Bakshi alot for things like that and its a shame this movie doesnt get more praise. people easily just dis this movie unfairly
The voice actor for Gollum, Peter Woodthorpe revised his performance for the BBC radio production, and did an amazing job. I greatly prefer it to Serkis' take. (Nothing wrong with either, just personal preference).
Same
@@keithcurtis It's even more impressive when you consider he had to act without visuals. You can't see his radio take on Gollum, but you can imagine it vividly.
As far as I'm concerned, it still is! 🤣 McBride's art is truly some great stuff! His work for "MERP" truly set the atmosphere for a great role playing system!
While the Bakshi version has its issues, I firmly believe that Bakshi’s all shall love me and despair scene with Galadriel is much closer to the book version than Jackson’s. It’s full of almost self deprecating humility, which is how she resists the lure.
My mental "all shall love me and despair" is far away from both. I see it more as bitter. Not humble, nor powerful. I see it as almost the tone you'd use to say something like "The children of your womb. You have taken my sons
and destroyed me." Dominion had been Galadriel's dream. This was everything she had wanted and more. It was a dream, and then as she's speaking she realizes the terrible cost, and that is it a thing that she cannot accept. It is a destruction of her view of self.
Ralph Bakshi is certainly, at least, a pioneer and innovator. A bigger pioneer and innovator over frigging Peter Jackson for damn sure. For example, creators and fans of things like Heavy Metal, Ren and Stimpy, South Park, and Futurama all owe Bakshi a debt. Now, do tell us, WHAT exactly has Peter Jackson influenced? .. . zilch!
No for me is bad like Galadriel laugh like that is cringe
No for me is bad like Galadriel laugh like that is cringe
@@IanFindly-iv1nl Quit spamming the comments with this.
I loved this when I was a kid. I found the orcs and the ring wraiths really sinister.
The ringwraith's growling and moaning were hilarious.
Ralph Bakshi is certainly, at least, a pioneer and innovator. A bigger pioneer and innovator over frigging Peter Jackson for damn sure. For example, creators and fans of things like Heavy Metal, Ren and Stimpy, South Park, and Futurama all owe Bakshi a debt. Now, do tell us, WHAT exactly has Peter Jackson influenced? .. . zilch!
The jim henson muppet orcs in jackson's were often pretty craptastic, Gothmog looked like a joke from Goonies
When I was a little kid in the '80s, this was my favourite fantasy movie. I was always sad that Bakshi never finished the adaptation with a sequel. I do think that the Peter Jackson adaptations blew this out of the water and completely replaced it for me, but this one still has a special place in my heart as I remember watching it with my dad and then talking about all the things left out from the books.
Opposite for me lol after the book it sort of disturbed and messed with my young head. Glad you loved it!
Pretty much the exact same story for me. I watched that ending so many times and wished they'd finished it. It must be very different for people growing up now with the Jackson films in existence, which tell the complete story. Everything I saw at that time - both in this film and video games - only covered part of the story.
i still can't stomach the jackson version
Since you mentioned the John Boorman script, here's a fun fact about it: Boorman actually did build one set in preparation for filming. He built the Council of Elrond, and not wanting that set to go to waste, he recycled it into his 1981 Arthurian epic Excalibur. In the scene where Guinevere is on trial and Lancelot fights Gawain to defend her honour, the woodland setting and wooden structure in which the trial and combat take place are actually the Council of Elrond set he had intended to use in Lord of the Rings. So, while we'll never know what the full John Boorman LOTR film would have looked like, watching that scene from Excalibur can give us a slight glimpse.
Excalibur is a classic.
Fun fact: I saw Fritz the Cat and Excalibur in the same theater, a couple of months apart.
boorman did a few classic films himself. excalibur and especially hope and glory are still favorites
I didn't know that. Cool. At least it did not go to waste then.
People have to appreciate how incredibly ambitious and ahead of its time this project was.
Sorta too ahead.
I actually got to see it in a movie theater last week. Gandalf was such a fabulous drama queen and Sarumans of many colours scene was great xd. I really loved how orcs were made though at first i was a bit jarred.
What a trip
it really was 'of the time' not ahead of its time. but i still love parts of it and jackson must have too or he wouldn't have stolen so much of it shot for shot
@@sunnuntaiselori1927 Would love to see it on the big screen, warts and all.
To answer your questions about how they nazgul pulled Frodo into the other dimension. What they were showing was that the Nazgul truly exist in a spirit realm and only have a shadow of themselves in the material world. When Frodo is stabbed he is being transformed into a wraith by the blade to making it's way to his heart. So he is very close to being made into a wraith at this stage. It's also the same when he puts on the ring in the Jackson films - he is moved into that plane of existence and sees the Nazgul as they truly are.
The Last Unicorn was not a Bakshi film, but it was a Rankin Bass film (who did the animated Hobbit)
And Return of the King
yeah when they said that i was like WHAAAT? but research really isn't this channel's strong point
It did get a sequel, but not by Bakshi. In '80 Rankin-Bass picked up where it left off in their "Return of the King: A Tale of the Hobbits." It's pretty bad, but who can forget the tune "Where there's a Whip there's a Way?"
I bought the animated "trilogy" of Bakshi's version, plus the two RB films, the Hobbit and the Return of the King. To me, they're like a three-legged stool. They don't quite work individually, but together, they hold up. Bakshi's rotoscoped film is fantastic, and the RB movies book-end the story with the prequel and the sequel.
You young people might have gotten spoiled by having access all your lives to the Jackson movies, lol. Bakshi was light years ahead of The Hobbit and Return of the King movies that it was supposed to be a bridge for (those are cringey and awful but we still enjoyed them). I wish he had done part 2 but he was at least faithful to the books. And to me, Bakshi's Aragorn more fits my mental idea than Viggo. And I will say one scene that Bakshi did better than Jackson is where Frodo is speared. Like I get that mithril is supposed to be impenetrable but much less suspension of disbelief that a thrown spear might glance off than that a 2-ton cave troll driving a spear down with its whole weight doesn't pierce?? Always a pleasure, Jess!
My understanding is that Rankin and Bass made the Return of the King to in some way to complete the story started by Bakshi's Lord of the Rings.
If by complete you mean cash in
Uh oh... An old friend of mine just had spikes put on his pillars and has been acting differently. But I think I have a chance now to avoid being captured. Thanks so much for the warning!
No unnecessary Arwen scenes. Gets my thumbs up.
Just imagine if Bakshi had been given the Budget of a disney movie at the time... this could have been SO MUCH BETTER! (instead of a tenth of the necessary budget he was given!)
"We're not giving you more of our money. No, Precious, we keeps it!"
i kinda wished he'd invested the whole amount into the first third of this film, made it look three times as good and when they asked where the money had gone - he pointed to what he had and said, we could finish it, but i need the cash to make it look this good. we would have come out with a far superior film (and maybe jackson would have never gone on to shit all over the legacy of the works and fantasy filmmaking in general)
I mean the fellowship in the film is by far the best part. I personally really enjoy that half of the movie!@@jerkchickenblog
Some things I thought this film did pretty well:
-The chase to the Ford of Bruinen, both because Frodo actively defied the wraiths like in the book instead of becoming a wet noodle backpack, and because of the stylised trippiness. I assume it looks like that because it's Frodo's POV and he's being drawn into the "Unseen" world, the wraith-world, which had been previously been shown in the Weathertop scene. It's honestly a cool interpretation. I also love that crackly echo of the wraith voice saying "come back...to Mordor we will take you..." Real chilling stuff.
-Gandalf's eccentric movements may "milk the giant cow" a lot, as the old Tolkien Sarcasm Page put it, but I honestly find his grumpier side and "I'm too old for this shit" expressions quite hilarious and charming at times.
-The fight scenes are a bit janky animation-wise, but they do manage to feel more kinetic and bloody compared to some of Jackson's more cartoony action shots. In being more grounded, they depict the horror of war and battle without it feeling like an excuse for swag. I mean, I'm pretty sure actual ancient warfare was rather gruesome and chaotic and not like Tony Hawk Pro-Skater with a bow and arrow. 😅
-John Hurt. Enough said.
John Hurt and Michael Graham Cox also voiced Hazel and Bigwig in Watership Down, respectively. Brilliant voice acting!
Yes, the Wraiths at the Ford were from Frodo's point of view.
I think they had a really interesting take on the battle between Gandalf and Saruman which was more based on Will and power level versus battle spellcasting. I also liked how they handled Boromir.
@@JGComments That scene between Gandalf and Saruman was wild. I still have a hard time figuring out what's going on there. 😅
Of course in the novel there's no battle or magic involved in their confrontation, really. Just harsh words. Then Gandalf just says he was taken and imprisoned, presumably by some of Saruman's lackeys.
@@stapler942 I kind of took the exchange of colors to represent a measuring of power or wills between them. As you mentioned there is no battle in the books, but I thought it was an interesting way to quickly show that Saruman was more powerful than Gandalf at the time. I like it better than the extended Harry Potter-esque duel in the Peter Jackson version.
Fun fact about the music in this movie: Bakshi had originally wanted to use Led Zeppelin songs for the soundtrack, and Led Zeppelin were actually enthusiastic about the idea. However, record company shenanigans being what they are, this of course did not happen.
The music that *was* used, by Leonard Rosenman, comes back in the Star Trek movie that had whales in it.
I really like Frodo in Bakshis Lord of the Rings, and Gimli finding Balins Grave feels a lot more powerful.
Frodo in Bakshi looked a lot like the Frodo in my head from reading the books.
Saruman/Aruman was an editorial decision to differentiate the wizard from Sauron. Similar names that they felt could be easily confused. The decision came down mid-production and there was not enough money or time to correct or call actors back for re-recording. In fact, most of the style shifts come down to budget and time compromises. The production of the movie is actually pretty interesting and worth a deeper dive.
I wouldn't mind, either, but a lot of Yu-Gi-Oh! and Digimon fans upon hearing that would probably think they were taking the piss! It's like when someone, I forget who, thought kids would be confused by different but seemingly similar bugs! It was on RUclips so someone naturally put in the Comments "Pinsir and Heracross: "Are we a joke to you?""
I can understand that. When my dad showed me the Peter Jackson trilogy when I was young, I remember getting Saruman and Sauron mixed up a lot
Things, I reckon worked better in the Bakshi version:
Wringwraiths:
Bakshi managed to make the wringwraiths far more ethereal and menacing than Jackson did. In Jackson's version, the wringwraiths are pursuers with a touch of supernatural about them. In the Bakshi version, the wringwraiths go through a whole arc of dread. When you see the first wringwraith, he is a shambling body mired in black shadows. He is walking with a stiff limb, his arms twisted. He invokes the feeling of a corpse reanimated. Spooky, but not really scary. Run quick enough and you will get away from him. As the fellowship keeps running into the wringwraiths, they take on more and more supernatural qualities. In Bree they emerge from out of the dark, looming over the beds of the hobbits like priests in a ritual, swords drawn, intend made clear. They did not walk into the room, they simply appeared. Next, Aragorn and the hobbits meet them in the dead of night and the wringwraiths have changed from shambling corpses to incorporeal creatures, armed and determined, eyes glowing red. No weapon can harm them, no prowess stop them. It becomes very clear now that a form of transformation has taken place. These aren't mere corpses that are after Frodo, but terrifying predators, clad in ethereal armor, who cannot be stopped by any means the fellowship possesses. Finally, Frodo's flight with the wringwraiths in pursuit. Now they have fully shown themselves. Black riders with grotesque features. "The ring, the ring. Come back. To Mordor we will take you. The ring, the ring." They have finally shown their dreadful true selves to Frodo.
It just works so much better. It gives the wringwraiths layers. Not layers in their personality, but in the fear they embody. It swells and gives a true sense of urgency.
Orcs:
Aaaaaah, the Uruk-Hai attacking Helm's Deep. I love it. The red sky, the rolling drums creeping over the hills. Lightning cracks, wargs speed unto the plains and then a black host emerges. War horns are blown, skull totems are hoisted. From within the endless masses of bodies, red eyes can be seen. You can see the barbaric nature of the orcs here. No uniform armor, no columns, just a roiling mob of warriors. Thousands upon thousands of them, cruel, villenous but also crude. Whereas the orcs in Jackson's second movie would slaughter all the people at Helm's Deep it seemed to me that they would do so, because Saruman had ordered them to. In Bakshi's version it felt like the orcs would have slaughtered everyone, because it was part of their vile nature. While Jackson had to physically show the despair of the people of Rohan at the arrival of the Uruk-Hai, Bakshi didn't have to do that. His orcs seemed so much more cruel and evil, that I COULD FEEL THE DESPAIR MYSELF. When I watched this movie as a kid, I was seriously shook, wondering how the heroes were even supposed to win against such a dark and evil force. When I watched the Jackson version, it seemed ... kinda staged... It was clear that the heroes were going to win.
Theoden's charge:
Very specific scene, but I really prefered the charge of Theoden in the Bakshi version. 1: He didn't have to be convinced by Aragorn to do so. 2: It actually looked like he was going to pull it off. The orcs take flight, he and his men slaughter the stragglers and victory is close. 3: Then comes the realisation- The orcs have regrouped and surrounded the king and his men. All hope is lost. The music changes to a sad, down-beaten tune, as the orcs slowly make their way towards Theoden, as if to put the Rohirrim out of their misery. I really thought that this was it. I was convinced that the movie was going to end with all the good guys getting butchered by these orcs.
So yeah, thats my take.
Your comment is epic, not in the contemporary overused sense of "badical" (criminy...now THERE'S an outdated idiom) but epic in the classic sense. Poetry (or prose) composed by a bard, to be commented on by sages and repeated by other sages.
Your thumbs up numbered 13, the significant figure. And my thumb's up made it an ordinary 14. Unless you think of that number as twice times 7, the prime number of perfection.
A lot of the characterisation was more faithful as well. As time has passed more and more of the ‘minor’ things in the later films, such as the shameful degradation of the character of Gimli, has come to bother me as much as the ridiculous (the wizard breakdancing and exorcism of Theoden, the ‘dead’ in the Dead Marshes) and the unforgivable (Denethor, Frodo, Faramir, Merry) changes.
This is what made the fandom so nervous when the Jackson movies were announced.
What's really amazing to me is the rotoscoping process because it is so close to live action. The main characters being more cartoon take me out of the story a bit. Fascinatingly Bakshi also animated Spider-Man in the 1960s. That show is trippy. and I love it having seen it as a kid.
They filmed it live action then used rotoscoping, that’s why the film was so expensive
the main characters being more cartoon /is/ the rotoscoping - for the majority of the extremely live action-looking footage, they ran the film through a xerox to flatten the darks into clear lines and colored some elements, it's not a traditional rotoscope and it was not all hand-drawn
Well regardless of how much he might offend your contemporary P.C. sensibilities, Ralph Bakshi is certainly, at least, a pioneer and innovator. A bigger pioneer and innovator over frigging Peter Jackson for damn sure. For example, creators and fans of things like Heavy Metal, Ren and Stimpy, South Park, and Futurama all owe Bakshi a debt. Now, do tell us, WHAT exactly has Peter Jackson influenced? .. . zilch!
@@IanFindly-iv1nl if you are addressing this comment too me, then you have the wrong impression about what I said. I'm not offended by Ralph Bakshi's work.
@@IanFindly-iv1nl what
Positive: I feel different about Galadriel. I actually prefer this version of her to Jackson's version. She has a much more motherly personality. Also, in the book, when Frodo offered her the ring, she actually laughed; in the Jackson movie, she became massively creepy.
Negative: I recall my brother hating how they gave Boromir the opera Viking horns.
John Boorman's inability to get his own LOTR film off the ground was actually a blessing in disguise in that he took that creative energy and went on to do Excalibur instead, a true medieval fantasy classic. His ability to cover so much epic ground in a single film is evident in his retelling of the Arthurian legend..
This is not the only thing that looks like this. in 1977, Bakshi made another movie called _Wizards_ which is kind of a post-apocalyptic fantasy thing, involving Nazis. It was made in the same style of rotoscoping and live-action. It's very...weird.
My friends and I watched Wizards at the midnight showing several weeks in a row and (obviously) loved it. When we heard Bakshi was doing Lord of the Rings, we had really high hopes. At the time the movie came out, I'd read the trilogy three times, and it was well on its way to being my favorite book ever. Sadly, Bakshi's movie was a severe disappointment. Chopped up story due to budget and time limitations, obvious mistakes allowed in the final print, odd costume and character design choices, weird shifting between rotoscoping and live action (which worked so well in Wizards - go figure). It just didn't work. And of course we didn't know going in that he was expecting to make a sequel, so we were massively let down.
I definitely enjoyed Wizards a LOT more than his LOTR.
There's also Fire and Ice
@@kierancoghlan2743 I don't know that one. Where does it fall on the LOTR to Wizards spectrum?
@Brandyalla I haven't actually seen Wizards. The rotoscoping is a lot more polished than LOTR but the story is very basic.
Uniquely animated. There's never been a movie that looks like this film.
.. Then clearly this guy next to her never saw 'Heavy Metal.' Big eye-roll.. +
@@onojioboardwalk9748 Heavy Metal is rotoscoped but doesn't really resemble LOTR.
@@JoeyArmstrong2800 Right, Except.. It usually 'Does' and my point was that this guy says he's 'Never seen a film like this lord of the rings adaptation..' When theres at least one or two more. +
for good reason
Until Bakshi did the same with Fire and Ice
Someone (I think Dan Olson over on the Folding Ideas channel) said that, apparently, the "Aruman" thing is _not_ merely an error no one caught, but that at some stage in the production there waz a concern that Sauron's name and Saruman' were too similar (both start with the letter S, you see) and would confuze viewers, and so they decided to -use Saruman's canonical Elvih name, Curunir, instead- cut off the initial S and make the name Aruman. Apparently this decizion was later reverced, but some or all of the dialogue that had already been recorded waz left as it was, since s iz an unobtrucive letter in Englich and people mi s its pre ence or abcence all the time.
Oh, that makes a lot of sense! I also didn't realize what you were doing until I got to the end of the comment, and thought I was losing my mind for a brief moment haha. Thanks for illuminating that!
Folding Ideas review of this movie has become a yearly rewatch for me. Its so good!
I read this comment like 10 times.... and all I have to ask is why? why? why?
I'm not saying that good rotoscoping can't exist but every example of it I've seen has always been a clear attempt of an animator with limited budget and/or talent skimping on production costs.
Actually Bakshi didn't make the The Last Unicorn film, that was Rankin/Bass! And (even though it's not LotR related) I'd be interested if you did a reaction to it
In 1979 I was home on leave from Germany and saw this in a drive in. I anxiously waited for the part 2 that never came. I knew it wasn't great, but it was Lord of the Rings, on film. Also, I subscribed because you asked me to.
For me I think one of the most memorable things about this film is the background art style and the fact that a lot of the orcs were just guys in gorilla masks and they made it work (sort of)
The movie is hard to watch in places, and I think it suffered from being too low budget for what was needed. Regarding the Galadriel scene, I think it got across an important point better than Jackson's version: she meant to test Frodo, but was instead tested herself. Nobody ever understands that scene in Jackson's version. But I also think many scenes were too rushed and more poorly framed than in the Jackson version. IMO, the worst parts of the Bakshi version are the outfits (Boromir the Viking, pageboy Aragorn, etc.) and the Elven faces, though I'd probably add to that list with a rewatch. Also, I really like how creepy the early Nazgul scenes are in this one. I might be biased from watching this several times as a child, but all the Nazgul appearances up to the river ford really hit me.
As a kid the animated LOTR was all we had and it was incredible. I still love it. When I read the books even today it’s the Bakshi characters I picture and the soundtrack is phenomenal.
Ralph Bakshi's version of Lord Of The Rings was my definitive film version through most of my life. In some ways I find it is better than the Peter Jackson Trilogy, as wonderful as they are. Before Andy Serkis's Gollum, whenever I imagined him sneakin'...I mean, speaking, it was always Peter Woodthorpe's interpretation of his voice that I heard.
Bakshi didn't do The Last Unicorn, Rankin Bass did :)
This movie was what got me reading the books. My dad show me and my little brother the animated Hobbit first then this. I was so creeped out by the Black Riders that I started reading the book to figure out what they were. And to this day though I can't decide if I like it or not
It seems to me what Bakshi choose to do was to go for a very direct visual code - so the root of the word 'Wraith' in old english is a twisted or knotted thing, so they are physically diplayed by Bakshi as twisted and knotted up in their movements, similatly Aragorn is a famed tracker and outdoors man so he looks native American, Boromir comes from a great race of sea faring warriors who settled Gondor, so he looks Viking and so on. Where Bakshi had not the time in script to give the backstories he seems to have opted for conveying the meaning through visual code.
I agree ... I can't decide whether i liked it or not.
Ah yes, Bakshi version that spawned the Aragorn meme "I will not put on pants _until I'm KING!"_
Thing about the Boreman film. When he couldn't get it made he Made Excalibur instead. That film was somewhat influenced by a short film released contemporaneously with the making of Excalibur called Black Angel and released as a support feature with The Empire Strikes Back in the UK. Excalibur was very influential on the look and tone of the Jackson movies and later Game of Thrones. So it all goes round in circles.
I saw this in the theater with my dad as a kid. It was my first introduction to LOTR. When we got home my dad gave me his copy of the Hobbit to read because I loved the movie so much. My favorite parts of this movie are the introduction explaining the ring and Moria. Moria is just pure 100% adventure for a little boy.
The wierd rotoscoping always felt like it couldn't quire keep up with the live action, and produces a wierd dreamlike disconnect for me that makes me feel very strange, like my perception is slowing down to match the animation. A lot of it feels like local theatre, and they didn't really rehearse or direct it - the scene of the Three Hunters where Aragorn's rotoscope trips on his sword and falls is legendary, especially as that is the take they chose to use!
Bakshi did his movie "Wizards" to practice the rotoscoping. Not a great movie, but fun and interesting, worth checking out. actually enjoyed his vision on this, wish he'd been given Pt 2 instead of them going back to Bass.
It occurred to me watching this recently that this Galadriel reminds me of a 70s new age guru.
9:00 Best part! Why did he freak him out like that??
Intrusive thoughts won
I think about that moment so often
I honestly love this version of Gandalf when he gets cranky, his movements always make him look like he's old and world-weary and quite eccentric but he's able to summon strength when he really needs to.
It would have really suited the playful Gandalf from The Hobbit too. Imagine him trolling Bilbo with sudden random poking movements just to keep Bilbo from forsaking his adventure.
Fritz of the Rings was a great movie.
As a teen I went by myself to see this in the theater … possibly it was the first time I ever saw a movie by myself, but it came back to the theater for a special one-off, and by that time I was a Tolkien fan, had to see it. Boy, was I disappointed 😂
I really like Bakshi's take on the Galadriel scene more than Jacksons... Galadriel is power hungry in the lore, but she's also had time to realize that power isn't all it's cracked up to be so her kind of laughing it off... I like that.
Ralph (i belive at Terry Toons) helped create Mighty Mouse and the Spiderman show (the one with the iconic theme song) that is still my favorite spiderman show and by far the definitive version of the character!
The trippy journeys into other dimensions by Spiderman (with Dr. Strange? It's been a long time since I've seen episodes of it) felt familiar--knowing Bakshi made those makes so much sense now.
You have to think back to 1977 - when Masterpiece Theatre premiered I, Claudius to the US public. Within a year, this film came out. Alien had yet to be released, and most average US viewers had very little exposure to John Hurt aside from Midnight Express. So it was funny to hear the voice of the mad emperor Caligula in the mouth of Aragorn. "...if by life or death I can save you, I will...if it wasn't for all this galloping in my head!"
I love this film as cooky as it is it's just brilliant.
On a more serious note, the 1981 bbc radio deama remains the DEFINITIVE version to this day, yes even above the jackson trilogy it is chef kiss glorious.
The 1981 radio broadcast also forms a sort of "bridge" between the Bakshi LOTR and the Peter Jackson trilogy, at least in terms of the cast. Gollum and Boromir were voiced by the same actors as in the Bakshi film, and Frodo was voiced by future Bilbo Baggins actor Ian Holm. I was especially impressed by the radio adaptation's Saruman. He really did sound magically persuasive when he spoke! I also liked that they included characters that never appear in other adaptations, such as Glorfindel, and scenes like Saruman's and Wormtongue's interactions with the Black Riders when the Riders were searching for the Shire.
Aragorn: "Legolas what do your elf eyes see?"
Legolas: "Too much Aragorn, too much"
"I'm not really hungry right now, but let's use this spatula as a microphone in case we decide we want omelettes halfway through our filming session."
Going back to this film after only really watching the extended cuts of the Lord of the Rings films, I was actually surprised how much I enjoyed this. It's NOT perfect, and I feel they mischaracterized Sam and the Balrog scene was...silly at best, but the tone and atmosphere was not bad and it was interesting to see how much Peter Jackson homaged in his Fellowship film. BTW, you said that Bakshi did the Last Unicorn, but that was a Rankin Bass film, who did the Hobbit and Return of the King.
I know Baski's son just recently did an article woth TOR.n and it showed what the balrog WOULD have looked like if he had been given a proper budget. It looked so much better!
@@Schellnino1994 oooOOOOooooo! I'll have to look that up. It was really one of the only scenes that was rather poor. A guy in a paper mache demon costume...just doesn't get the look across, lol.
@@Schellnino1994 Lol, youtube tried to delete it but I got the link anyway so thanks. Very interesting footage. I like the shape shifting serpentine form the Balrog took. Too bad they couldn't reedit the film to include it.
@@straker454 ahhhh i didnt realise youtube did that!! thank you
Tom Bombadil was also cut from the BBC radio play. He is cut in most adaptations, the only notable exception being the Mind's Eye theater radio play.
I mean... he is sort of a side show with little to no impact on the overall story. He even kinda undercuts the threat of The One Ring's corrupting influence by just handling it with no ill effect, despite being an entity of similar stature to Gandalf or Galadrial who both made big deals about it...
I saw this in the theater when it came out. It followed the book fairly well. The looks of some of the characters were very cartoonish when it didn't seem to fit, Aragorn and Elrond particularly. The scenes of the battles were done in the different style which really heightened the action. This was very experimental with the different types of animation, and I enjoyed it.
The Return of the King by Rankin Bass is actually part 2 of Bakshi's LOTR.
Jackson bought the production art work of this film from Bakshi but did not credit him for the numerous times that the live version replicated scenes; scenes that were Bakshi's own idea e.g. the 4 hobbits travelling together to Bree or them hiding under a tree root to escape the Black Rider. I often see Bakshi's film interpretation as the rough draft of Jackson's and I wonder if Jackson would have created something as good without the head start that Bakshi gave him. Yes, it is often annoyingly shoddy but it treats Frodo as a brave character (Bilbo thought him the bravest hobbit in the Shire) and not the timid being Jackson portrays him as.
Bakshi’s LotR is apparently how Peter Jackson was first introduced to the story, so there are in fact influences from this movie that inspired parts of Jackson’s trilogy
Fun fact, john hurt (that's who played aragorn) actually tripped over his prop sword, and for some reason they decided to animate it and keep it in
YAY! You did it! The Bakshi version is my favourite. :-)
Animation really was the only way to film TLOTR movies because in '00's money it cost roughly $93 million UDA and that's a lofty sum even in 2023 so you imagine having to convince a Studio Suit to give you a unheard-of sum of $93 million? I think it would be like in Austin Powers when Dr. Evil asked for $1 billion dollar in 1969.😂
So, being a massive Tolkien fan, this was the first film I ever saw that replicated in some way, my love of the books. A few points that I loved was that it is VERY close to the books in the main (aside from it wasn't Legolas that rescued Frodo at the Anduin) but also it is correct that the Riders appeared in "other worldly" mode. Some of the voice actors in the BBC radio play in 1980 played characters they played in the film i.e. Peter Woodthorpe (Gollum/Sméagol) and Michael Graham Cox (Boromir) had previously voiced the same roles in Bakshi's film in 1978. Ian Holm, who voiced Frodo Baggins in the radio serial, went on to play Bilbo Baggins in Jackson's film trilogy in the early 2000s. Rotoscoping was, at the time simpy "Scratch animation" which isn't the same. Also - no adaptation of the books includes Tom Bombadil :) Peter Jackson in later years accepts that some inspiration for his films was taken from the Bakshi version.
My parents took me to a theater when it came out in Japan. (I still have the booklet we bought there.) My parents did have no idea what the movie about - I think they thought it was just another Disney-type kid animation movie. Well, the nine riders did scare me for a while...
The rotoscoping is uncanny valley and creepy af.
As someone who saw it in the theaters when it came out, I agree that the biggest problem was fans weren't told it was a part one. There was no internet or other good way to get the word out to fans back then. I literally loudly yelled "What!!!" in the theater when the film ended and left the theater angry despite enjoying what I had seen. The film is beautiful, especially the Shire woods. I would have been disappointed but would have accepted it as just part one had I known it in advance. I was fine with the rotoscoping because I had seen Bakshi use it previously in Wizards (which is also pretty good, at least for the 70s) and thought it an interesting and effective technique. Bakshi's LOTR is a better film than most people think when they see it, but they're usually comparing it to the Jackson films which isn't fair. I believe Jackson even learned some of what to do and not to do when making his version. I wish Bakshi had been given a chance to finish his LOTR. I think it would have been fondly remembered and as a complete story it would have been popular even on VHS.
When I saw this movie when it came out I was already an adult who had read LOTR a few times. Most of the adults, including me, were deeply shocked and disappointed at being let down. Should have been titled 'Half of the Lord of the Rings" simplified down to the level of Sunday morning cartoons. However I do have an absolutely pristine poster of this movie framed above my bed. Could easily have been a poster from Peter Jackson's epic.
You skipped the one moment that Jackson took directly from this version. The bit from the party where the proudfoot corrects Bilbo with proudfeet.
hey listen you little punks, im 50 - this was the BEST!!! HAHAH LOVE U GUYS
Loving your reviews of some of the other adaptations and can't wait for your take on Rankin & Bass's Return of the King! The bit about Mick Jagger was interesting, and I hope you do a short video on that time the Beatles seriously considered doing an adaptation and tapped Kubrick to possibly direct. Not entirely related to LoTR, but you might enjoy Bakshi's "Wizards".
Fun fact: there was a children’s storybook tie-in of this movie and it was called The Lord of the Rings Part One. Maybe the only official publicity that it wasn’t a complete film
I was old enough to drive myself to the premier of this film when it opened. I was fairly new to the books, had read a certain amount about this production, and was very excited about the prospects of what I was about to see. Let’s just say that your critique of the film was considerably kinder that mine. This is probably the largest amount of the movie that I’ve been able to watch since the premier and the clips you’ve shown haven’t done anything to change my opinion.
my left ear loves this video
i love the way he did the wizard fight.
Saw it in 1978.We were both Lord of the Rings fans and my husband knew I would want to see it. Brings back lots of happy memories. Newly married and sitting in a theater, holding hands.. I had a tube of (Kilobytes?) memory for our apple II in my purse. The computer shop was next store. I think of that tube of computer chips sometimes when playing a game on my phone.
I remember not liking the art style. I watched part of it, recently, though, and I realized how actual quotes were used. It wasn't a terrible movie and it was going to be all we got for a good long time. I never bought it in either VHS or later, DVD. I actually had become reconciled that there would be NO Lord of the Rings movie within my lifetime by the late 1980s. I was wrong, of course.
i also saw Fritz the cat when dating my future husband in 1975. I married him anyway. 🙂 🙃😊
A mess maybe, but I saw it in the cinema when it was released. Fond memories. With the whole family, my father introduced me to The Hobbit and LOTR.
I actually have the animated Lord of the rings, return of the king, the hobbit and Ralph Bakshi's Wizards and Fire and Ice movies. I appreciate the work that goes into rotoscope. The 60s and 70s was a great time of experimentation within art and fashion. I don't think we have an equivalent since then. (Obviously subjective) This was the Hobbit and LotR of my childhood and boy was it scary at some parts. EDIT not all of these are Ralph Baksi's work. But they are the animated movies from the 1970s. Peter Jackson's live action version is still better. But these have nostalgia going for them.
I Remember Watching This on TV and thought when are we getting part 2???
In some ways I prefer this version over Peter Jackson's version. One reason why is the fires of Isengard scene, where Saruman uses actual powerful magic spells to breach the wall during the battle, instead of using a mundane black powder bomb.
I've never seen this movie in its entirety, just bits of it strewn around the internet. I find the rotoscoping a bit hard to watch sometimes, but it seems like it did a good job of telling a lot of the story in the very limited time it had to do it. At least it had a battle of Helm's Deep scene. In Sweden in the 90's there was a radio adaptation that cut Helm's Deep entirely. Apart from basically every name being produced super weird, even from a Swedish standpoint, I kinda like it, but I will never get over them cutting my favorite battle scene. They just go to Edoras, save Theoden and then go straight to Isengard. What happened to the orcs? All killed by the ents off screen, don't worry about it.
This was actually part of a trio of fantasy movies Bakshi made. The others are Wizards, which features early voice acting by the Joker himself, Mark Hamill and character designs "influenced" by (Some would say stolen from) underground cartoonist Vaughn Bode, and Fire & Ice, a barbaric fantasy made in collaboration with fantasy painter Frank Frazetta.
Sadly the best animation work was in a deleted scene of Gandalf vs the Balrog (hence the dramatic stills used in place). The cut footage has a real Sword in the Stone vibe with Gandalf swimming through the air wielding Glamdring.
The way I understand it Hollymirkwood didn't see that there would be any real public interest in the story so Bakshi wasn't given adequate funding or time for the project. Bakshi resorted to rotoscoping only so that he could finish on deadline. The only reason we have P. Jackson's masterpiece is because he broke from Hollymirkwood's continued insistence on underplaying and underfunding what to them was a quaint and not very marketable story.
The director went Bakshiit crazy when he was told to finish the movie
I like that Frodo wasn't such a...for lack of a better term...wimpy Beta Male in this version. He has a semblance of courage, tries to fight the Wraith, and even at the border of Rivendel pulls out his sword and makes a final stand "You shall have neither the ring nor me!"
The Jackson Frodo was SUCH a shrimpy kind of character. The only courage and strength he had was literally going on the journey and resisting the ring...he just had a sense of perseverance and endurance to him. Outside of that, just a weak character.
This movie is what introduced me to lord of the rings. I loved it as a kid and hated how it didn’t have a part two. I had to wait a few years till the Peter Jackson movies came out for me to see how the story ended. It was also really cool comparing fellowship and two towers to this movie when I first saw then
I would honestly watch you watch almost anything, Tolkien or not. You are delightful, the two of you.
The Bakshi film is one of my favorite adaptations and one I loved growing up. Still has one of my favorite depictions of Boromir, Aragorn, and Frodo. Sam is a little goofier in this one but he has charm to him. Edit: Also, one of the stories I remember and hated is how the studio screwed Bakshi over with the naming of the film. (Haven't finished the video yet so don't know if its discussed.) But forcing him to not be allowed to have Part 1 in the name and make it clear there was a sequel planned frustrates me. I'd love to have seen Bakshi's vision for the rest of the trilogy.
9:01 combined with Jess's laugh burst looked like Gandalf spat in Sam's face
Peter Jackson took many DIRECT shots from Bakshi's film and used them in his. Bakshi had a great eye in his directing/visual ideas. Much of the story and characters are more in line with Tolkiens work and come on, John Hurt voicing Aragorn, top rate actors. Its not perfect at all, yet, gets the dark feel, and still works.
I unironically love this movie despite all of it's flaws, it's one of my favorites
I absolutely LOVED the Balrog. I saw this in the theatre and to this day when I think of the Balrog that is the image that comes to mind.
Fun fact, assets from the Boorman projects were used in the 1981 film, Excalibur.
This movie's version of Aragorn always gave me "Native American" vibes.
We just rewatched Fellowship extended...Just noticed Frodo (Elijah Wood's) face when Gandalf is speaking about the value of the mithril that no one knows he is wearing lmao!!
I absolutely LOVED the soundtrack growing up as a kid...
The speaking spatula 🤣 Works well though.
The Bakshi movie and Rankin-Bass Hobbit were my introductions to Middle Earth back in the 1970's..until I read the series in the 1980s.
I cherish these old animated movies
As far as I'm aware, bakshi wasn't involved in The Last Unicorn's production, that was a Rankin-Bass film. Easy to mix up when the author of last unicorn worked on this and rankin-bass did other tolkien movies though!
One thing I found interesting on my last watch of this film was that the backgrounds' art style doesn't stay consistent at all either!! It really is a mishmash project where you can see a ton of heart but it just.. doesn't quite manage to pull it off.
One thing I saw pointed out about it that I agree with deeply, is that because the live action was filmed on a budget, and the character outfits are based on what was available live action, it feels almost like a larp. the costumes are a bit bulky and cheap, the action is almost painfully mundane and realistic, which just adds to the.. weird 70s charm of it, not gonna lie.
While I can appreciate the uniqueness of Bakshi's lord of the rings making it interesting, especially from an animation history perspective, I definitely agree that the sum of its parts is more distracting than anything, and it ends up taking away from the movie. I think a great way to point this out is the movie's Treebeard - he was the only character not rotoscoped in any way and pretty much everyone agrees he's one of the best animated pieces of the movie! they definitely could not have afforded to animate everything like that, but if they could have I do think it would have been a better movie, if perhaps not as unique
I recorded this movie on a VHS video tape off the tv when I was at school and I loved it as a kid. Even now, the ending when Gandalf throws his sword into the air and the narrator says, "And so ends the first instalment of The Lord of the Rings." I got a massive shiver down my back. I agree with Dillon that the rotoscope battles were cool and as a teenager I loved the all blood, although some scenes are also oddly bloodless... The Hobbits were a bit too childish in places and yes Sam was woefully underestimated and I just can't see this version of Sam ever seeing off Shelob. I enjoyed yours and Dillon's commentary it was very entertaining. You should have shown the "Proudfoot" "Proudfeet" scene because PJ deliberately set up his cameras to copy this scene in his version decades later because he is also a fan of this version.